Reply With Quote
I give you they are a team just rebuilt but you have people like Pierce who couldn't miss anything last night and when he was in the bench, Allen was doing the same. What about Posey? When a team is shooting like that there's not so much you can do.
And Spur fans stop mentioning Tony Parker. Apparently fans of other teams think we are just missing him only because he's a good looking guy and brings Eva to the games. I mean its not like he's good or anything. Heaven forbid Spur fans think Tony Parker is key to the Spurs and blame our losses on his absence...
I give you they are a team just rebuilt but you have people like Pierce who couldn't miss anything last night and when he was in the bench, Allen was doing the same. What about Posey? When a team is shooting like that there's not so much you can do.
IMO the celtics would've lost had they had Garnett and Perkins.
Spurs would've stayed big. Would've kept some players off the floor that were killin the SPurs. I also think Garnett would've taken shots away from Pierce and Allen and others.
Just my opinion wich is founded in stupidity.
Nor would they have won without Duncan.
But without Parker, I believe the the team could adjust, have beckups step in, and at least have a fighting chance.
Take out Duncan, and the Spurs have no chance in . You can't make up for that.
I view the Celts the same way. Lose Pierce or Allen for a playoff series, and I believe they could still find a way to win. But without KG they're going down.
Posey was off and missed a couple of WIDE open shots.What about Posey? When a team is shooting like that there's not so much you can do.
Agreed though not much you could do about the perimiter players.
Bowen although should've started on Peirce to start the game.
Its easier to take away Ginobili and have the Spurs win witha healthy Parker and Duncan, than have a heatlhy Manu and Duncan an win without Parker.
wasn't posey who got 2 straight 3-pts to kill our only lead of the game?
My whole point is that all the media was like.....no Garnett, no Garnett.....well .....we didnt have Parker.....our LEADING scorer and play maker. You can just plug any friggen point guard in there and play the same!!!! How good would Phoenix have done against the Celts without Nash??? A Celtic upset obviously
oh yeah Tony Parker doesn't change the complexion of the game at all. With him or without him the Spurs are the same... I believe yes the Spurs can win without TP, but no will they win teh championship without him. They need him.
LMAO.....there is NO IN way the Celts win it all without Pierce......dude....you are sick......LOL.
I thought it was Allen.
I more than likely am wrong.
Actually Duncan is the leaing scorer on the team.My whole point is that all the media was like.....no Garnett, no Garnett.....well .....we didnt have Parker.....our LEADING scorer and play maker. You can just plug any friggen point guard in there and play the same!!!! How good would Phoenix have done against the Celts without Nash??? A Celtic upset obviously
Yeah...Brent Barry the Starter!!!
He who started 41 games in the last 4 years combined! And 28 of those 41 come in 1 year. Meaning that other than 2 months in 06', he stated 13 times in 3 seasons!
Tony drives to the lane with ease and is able to dish passes out BECAUSE of Tim Duncan's presence.When Tony drives the lane, everyone converges on him.....that allows him to dish to the 3pt. line, or a dump off underneath to whomever. You know what I meant
Parker's absence appeared to hurt the Spurs worse than KG not being in uniform for Boston.
Tim played a rather lethargic game, and the offense for San Antonio was stagnant.
I think Boston exploited Stoudemire not knowing our offense yet because he was just jacking wild shots when the defense clamped down. Vaughn likewise is worthless in those situations as he takes too long to get the team into its play.
Parker (and Barry some, too, I think) would have done a lot for the Spurs on the offensive end of the court.
But they can call it an upset if they want. It's a compliment to the Spurs actually.
I apologize on behalf of Spur fans for thinking Parker actually had some value to the Spurs. Obviously we are dillusional. I guess when I saw him holding up the MVP Finals trophy it was just a hallucination.
Seriously though I think all non Spur fans just have so much hate and jealousy that they are willing to say whatever to make themselves feel better. Most people are smart of enough to know that the Spurs will turn it on playoff time, and Tony Parker will be back by then, so that means Spurs have just as much chance as anybody in the NBA to win a championship. Oh and don't be upset because Spurs have a big 3 that every team would kill to have.
21 more FTS by one team and they played harder - bad refs + more hustle a close loss no big deal. BSPN
I don't see the reason for all the fuss and arguments. It was an upset. Sure the Spurs didn't have Tony and Barry and they were the road team. And yes Tony Parker is absolutely essential to the success of the Spurs. But, the Celtics were without their starting front court. KG might not be the go-to guy in the clutch or the #1 guy on offense, but he's the difference on that team. He's the true reason for their success this season. The Spurs should have over powered them down low. And, for all the Spurs fans who questioned the Celtics as legit for much of the season, especially without KG and Perkins, heck yeah they should have beaten Boston. Is it a mind-blowing, season-changing, meteoric upset? Of course not. But, it was an upset. Boston shouldn't be able to hang with a Parker-less Spurs without KG and Perkins. They just shouldn't.
I think that's part of the point by those questioning the Spurs. The supporting cast isn't helping the stars and that should be a major concern for the Spurs the rest of the way.
People would be wrong to undermine the value of Tony Parker. A guard who many analysts conceed is a top 5 PG in the league. Of course these same analysts don't even bring up the fact that he was missing from yesterdays game. Just that the Celts were without Garnett.
I will agree, it was an upset however.
I would think it was an upset if most of the spurs fans agree they thought the spurs would win the game before it was played. I honestly thought the spurs would lose the game, this particular game. So I don't see this as an upset as I wasn't expecting them to win at all. Had they played a little better in the last month or so, maybe I iwould have changed my mind coming this game.
On another note, I doubt big bady, house, posey and the other folks would play as aggresively as they dd last night in San Antonio. I actually, honestly think they would on their pants.
Yeah, I was really annoyed by the broadcasters out here - in the piece I heard about the game, they didn't even MENTION that TP was out. They talked about what an "amazing" job Davis did on TD, and what an great win it was for the C's, even though they were without KG.
Yeah, Kendrick Perkins was out too. But the Spurs are also playing without Barry. I think the loss is pretty meaningless, in the big picture, except it adds the the Celtics' swagger a little to say they've now beat the Spurs twice in a row, first in Boston since TD joined the league. But it doesn't mean much in terms of the playoffs, should these two teams meet in the Finals, which I think is a very real possiblity.
Don't get me wrong. I'm not degrading Parker or his role on the Spurs team in any way. 3 or 4 years ago, you would have read about me posting all sorts of complaints on his game, but he's proven to everyone what he can do.
And I know the 'media' are swept up with their newest darling in the Celtics. And it's typical of them to just focus on Garnett or Big Baby, and not talk about Parker let alone Barry being gone.
But to me Duncan will always be the main cog of the big 3. Always. That isn't taking away from Parker.
And likewise KG is the main component of their trio.
Considering the Celtics nearly lost to the T-Wolves the game before this one I'd say it was most definitely an upset. A gigantic one, no. But this was certainly a game they shouldn't have lost.
When the other team is fielding a front line of Big Baby Davis, Leon Powe, and Scalabrine there is no excuse to not take advantage of that. You have Duncan, arguably the best post player in the game, and your coach decided to play small ball for some reason.
So you mean to tell me that Parker is equal, or more important to the team than Tim Duncan?
You must be re ed.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
